February 24, 2025 Story by: Publisher
The council of the ABA Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar has suspended enforcement of the accreditation standard originally titled “Diversity and Inclusion” until Aug. 31 in the wake of a Trump administration executive order mandating the dismantling of diversity, equity and inclusion efforts and demands by the U.S. Department of Education that academic institutions eliminate DEI polices or risk federal funding cuts.
At its quarterly meeting in San Antonio on Friday, the council voted to pause its work on the latest round of revisions to the contentious rule—known as Standard 206—while developing a new draft that could be presented to the ABA House of Delegates at the ABA Annual Meeting in August.
“The committee’s view is that with the executive orders and the law being in flux, it would be an extreme hardship for law schools if our standards were to require them to do certain things that may cause them to take more litigation risks and potentially violate the law,” said Daniel Thies, chair-elect of the council and co-chair of its Strategic Review Committee.
In the interim, members of the council’s managing director’s office will consult law schools with scheduled accreditation site visits this spring, “and the staff will be putting together written guidance,” said Jennifer L. Rosato Perea, the managing director for accreditation and legal education at the ABA. All law schools at any stage in accreditation can receive support, she added.
“These decisions by the council help to ensure that the revision of Standard 206 continues moving forward while allowing the council to integrate legal developments and forthcoming guidance from the Department of Education,” according to a statement from the council Feb. 23. “The council’s commitment to ensuring access to legal education to all people, including those who have been historically excluded from the legal profession, has not changed. However, the council intends to ensure that the schools can comply with this standard consistent with applicable law.”
In addition, the council’s standard committee will take a new look at Standard 205, titled “Non‐Discrimination and Equality of Opportunity,” said Carla D. Pratt, chair of the Strategic Review Committee. But its enforcement was not suspended. Also, no action was recommended regarding Standard 303-C, which requires law schools to provide education related to cultural competence, racism and bias.
The section’s council is recognized by the Department of Education as the sole accrediting body for U.S. law schools and is an independent arm of the ABA for that function. Most states require applicants of the state bar to be graduates of an ABA-accredited law school.
The Feb. 14 “Dear Colleague” letter from Craig Trainor, the acting assistant secretary at the Education Department, which ordered the elimination of “racial preferences” in admissions, hiring and other areas by the end of February, and the White House executive order cited the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 2023 decisioneliminating race-based admissions as motivation.
But there has been heated debate over exactly what the Supreme Court’s decision means for diversity in law school admissions and hiring, both of which are emphasized by ABA accreditation standards. It has prompted a lengthy and deep look at Standard 206, which in recent proposals was renamed “Access to Legal Education and the Profession.”
The move Friday follows the second round of notice and comment on the contentious standard, after the council in November made revisions that included a list of 15 identity characteristics that law schools should consider in hiring and admissions.
Twelve comments were received. Among them was a memo from a coalition that included 21 attorneys general from conservative states stating that the revised version violated the Supreme Court’s decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College and “impermissibly impose race-based admissions and hiring requirements as a condition of accreditation.”
Those respondents said the proposed wording would force law schools to “choose between maintaining their accreditation and violating the law or following the law and putting their accreditation in jeopardy,” according to a Feb. 13 ABA council memo. “Having and enforcing revised Standard 206 may also harm the Council’s ability to continue as a recognized accreditor.”
Meanwhile, other groups, including several ABA entities and the Law School Admission Council, broadly supported the November revisions but offered concerns and suggested revisions to the title.
Source:ABA Journal
